Linux, Avionics, and spins

[agabriel at coe.neu.edu (Anthony J. Gabrielson)]

Hello,
	Thats what I was trying to say.  I didn't do as a good a job
though. He was not as safe as the media was saying he was.

Anthony

On Thu, 22 Jul 1999, Karl Hergenrother wrote:

> I'm an instrument rated pilot with 700 hours time.  I also worked for the Volpe
> center for 25 years, about 8 years of FAA projects.  I once was told by a Cessna
> employee that Cessna stopped making the Skyhawk and the 152 was that they had to pay
> their insurance company $20,000 for each new plane they sold.  The liability
> premium.  Yes, the FAA is a lumbering dinosaur.  There has not been a new piston
> engine certified for general aviation in the last 50 years!  The reason is that it is
> harder to sue old designs than new designs.  Therefore, keep the old technology.
> Would you buy an automobile with a 40's design engine that needed new rings and a
> valve job in 60,000 miles of 30-50 mph driving?
> 
> There is no doubt in my mind, or that of most any pilot with an instrument rating in
> single engine, fixed wing, GA aircraft, that JFK was over his head.  Way over his
> head.  He probably trained in a Skyhawk because it is a forgiving plane, hard to
> spin, and has a nice breaking stall for instructional purposes.  The first the plane
> he owned was a Skylane, the Skyhawk's  larger, faster big brother.  A logical
> progression.  Then, with 100 hours experience, he buys the Saratoga.  This is a hot
> airplane.  Big engine, hydraulic prop, retractable gear, fast, and what some pilots
> call 'slippery' (low aerodynamic drag).  If you lose control, even for a short time,
> the airspeed builds up fast.  And very quickly, particularly at low altitude (2,500
> feet), you have entered an unrecoverable situation.  I would guess, since he bought
> this plane only 4 weeks before the crash, he had less than 10 hours experience in the
> Saratoga.  Probably none of these hours were 'under the hood' (IMC training).
> 
> What good would automatic GPS tracking done?  It might have shortened the search time
> for the wreckage by a day, but I doubt it.  The FAA knew where to look from the radar
> tapes.  JFK has been criticized for not filing a flight plan.  An indication of a
> casual attitude, particularly considering the flight over water.  But not required.
> Would a flight plan saved him and his passengers?  No.  Technology can't protect us
> from bad judgment.  His first bad judgment was buying the Saratoga.  His subsequent
> errors have been cataloged by the media.
> 
> Sorry about the rant.  This whole episode was such a waste.
> 
> Karl
> 
> BTW, many foreign countries require an instrument rating for night flying.  I don't
> necessarily recommend it, but it is worth considering.  Some of these same countries
> will not register GA aircraft with more than 5,000 hrs. total flying time, regardless
> of the aircraft's condition.  Can you legislate good judgment?
> 
> Jerry Feldman {75562} wrote:
> 
> > Rich Braun wrote:
> >
> > > The interesting jobs are in avionics.  Fifteen years ago, I was developing
> > > Intel 8088 and 8051 code for flight-instrumention systems; the underlying
> > > technology was a few years old at the time.  The equivalent today would be
> > > building systems around something like a P100--FAA regulations require
> > > a few years of field experience for all the various components.
> > >
> > > It's very costly and tedious to get a product through all the hoops that
> > > the FAA imposes.  But it wasn't that aspect which killed off most technology
> > > development in general aviation:  it was lawsuits.  JFK Jr.'s plane was
> > > a rarity, a g.a. plane less than 15 years old.  The reason 95% of all g.a.
> > > planes today are that old is a set of legislative and judicial setbacks for
> > > manufacturers who faced unlimited liability after some court decisions sometime
> > > in the 1970s (maybe it was the 1980s).  Rather than accept liability for
> > > the entire life of a plane, they shut down their production lines.
> > This is very true. Cessna was the leader in GA aircraft with their single
> > and multi-engine high wing designs. Nearly the entire Cessna high-wing
> > aircraft are based on FAA type certificates going back well over 40 years.
> > While JFK Jr. purchased his aircraft used, it was a relatively new aircraft.
> > But still has the older instrumentation with needles. That does mean that
> > they may be able to determine airspeed and other information showing on the
> > instruments if the salt water did not erase the traces. Being an aviator
> > from the old school, I would prefer to have a pressure airspeed indicator,
> > an alcohol inclined plane ball (eg needle and ball), a pure barometric
> > altimiter, and a barometric rate of descent indicator. While these
> > instruments often lie, they are reliable and predictable. And, not to
> > forget, a real magnetic compass. I have experienced a complete in-flight
> > electrical failure (at night over water). Fortunately, I had a knee pad with
> > a light I could use as a flashlight. (Also, sparkplugs in a light plane are
> > powered by 2 independent magnetos which are totally independent of the
> > aircraft's electrical system). Light planes do not normally have a dual set
> > of instruments, so the older mechanical instruments are better. The newer
> > digital instruments, while much more accurate, can fail.
> > --
> > Jerry Feldman (HP On-Site Consultant) http://gbrweb.msd.ray.com/~gzf/
> > +-------------------------------------------------------+-----Note: ------+
> > | Raytheon Electronic Systems  (W) (781)999-1837/1-1837 | My views may not|
> > | Mail Stop:  S3SG10           (F) (781)999-4030/1-4030 | reflect the     |
> > | 180 Hartwell Road            (E) gzf at gbr.msd.ray.com  | views of my     |
> > | Bedford, MA 01730-2498       (H) gaf at mediaone.net     | employer.       |
> > +-------------------------------------------------------+-----------------+
> > -
> > Subcription/unsubscription/info requests: send e-mail with
> > "subscribe", "unsubscribe", or "info" on the first line of the
> > message body to discuss-request at blu.org (Subject line is ignored).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -
> Subcription/unsubscription/info requests: send e-mail with
> "subscribe", "unsubscribe", or "info" on the first line of the
> message body to discuss-request at blu.org (Subject line is ignored).
> 

-
Subcription/unsubscription/info requests: send e-mail with
"subscribe", "unsubscribe", or "info" on the first line of the
message body to discuss-request at blu.org (Subject line is ignored).